From Sam Harris
Excerpt Transcribed from Podcast Ask Me Anything #8
I continue to hear from people who have lost their religion and are powerfully relieved to have lost it. I’m really vividly in touch with [that] it is possible to lose one’s faith and to feel relieved of a problem rather than to be thrust into a new problem. For most faiths, people are spending a lot of their time thinking about unpleasant things like hell and sin. There is a tremendous amount of fear, and a tremendous amount of guilt and inner conflict. As Hitch used to say, you’re born sick and commanded to be well by religion — a fairly untenable situation for most people even if they don’t acknowledge it.
So for all the people that you may feel have lost their moorings, or never found them due to the absence of religion, there are those who have finally recognized how valuable their lives are… really the one life they know they have. Now they are newly in touch with that. Once you shed the fantasy life that is encouraged by religion… once you cease to be otherworldly, then you recognize that your life if not a rehearsal… it’s not a way station… it’s not something to be casually sacrificed for a fantasy of a world to come. It is your life in this moment that is profound. This universe, the only universe you can know, is the appropriate object of your awe… not some old book that tells you how to sacrifice goats.
Now this universe is a mystery, and it’s a beautiful one. And what is neither mysterious nor beautiful are the instructions for living that you will find in books like the Bible and Koran. So I don’t worry too much about arguing the case for reason, which is the case against faith. But I do worry about the problem of living a meaningful life… and about how people’s uncertainty of how to do that leads to unhappiness and worse.
I think I said in The End of Faith that for me it boils down to love and curiosity. I think that does cover it. Obviously you need love. If you don’t love someone in your life, perhaps not everyone, but surely someone, then you are missing something. You’re missing one of the main things that makes life good. So life without love is a problem.
Excerpted and Transcribed from Sam Harris podcast
As many of you know, I have come out strongly against Trump and tepidly for Clinton, and there are many questions about why I haven’t come out for a third party candidate. The reason is that to vote for anyone other than Clinton is to increase the likelihood that we will have President Trump… and I believe that would be potentially catastrophic. Many people have criticized me for my rejection of Trump and my support for Clinton, but unfortunately this criticism never makes much sense.
I’ve been very clear about describing Clinton as the lesser of two evils. There is a ton to say about why she is not a great candidate. I totally understand why some people don’t like her and don’t trust her, but even with all her problems, she will probably be a competent President. In fact, I think she stands the chance of being a good President because she is actually smart and well informed and reasonably concerned about not destroying the world. And that’s true even with all the stupid lies and mistakes trailing behind her. Yes, there is something fairly rapacious and opportunistic about both Clintons. But their vices are mostly aligned with reasonable policies. There are exceptions but I think this is generally true. And, most crucially they are not idiots or ignoramuses.
From Sam Harris
Version 2.4 (June 21, 2014)
A few of the subjects I explore in my work have inspired an unusual amount of controversy. Some of this results from real differences of opinion or honest confusion, but much of it is due to the fact that certain of my detractors deliberately misrepresent my views. The purpose of this article is to address the most consequential of these distortions.
A general point about the mechanics of defamation: It is impossible to effectively defend oneself against unethical critics. If nothing else, the law of entropy is on their side, because it will always be easier to make a mess than to clean it up. It is, for instance, easier to call a person a “racist,” a “bigot,” a “misogynist,” etc. than it is for one’s target to prove that he isn’t any of these things. In fact, the very act of defending himself against such accusations quickly becomes debasing. Whether or not the original charges can be made to stick, the victim immediately seems thin-skinned and overly concerned about his reputation. And, rebutted or not, the original charges will be repeated in blogs and comment threads, and many readers will assume that where there’s smoke, there must be fire.
Such defamation is made all the easier if one writes and speaks on extremely controversial topics and with a philosopher’s penchant for describing the corner cases—the ticking time bomb, the perfect weapon, the magic wand, the mind-reading machine, etc.—in search of conceptual clarity. It literally becomes child’s play to find quotations that make the author look morally suspect, even depraved.
From SAM HARRIS
My recent collision with Ben Affleck on Bill Maher’s show, Real Time, has provoked an extraordinary amount of controversy. It seems a postmortem is in order.
For those who haven’t seen the show, most of what I write here won’t make sense unless you watch my segment above:
So what happened there?
I admit that I was a little thrown by Affleck’s animosity. I don’t know where it came from, because we hadn’t met before I joined the panel. And it was clear from our conversation after the show that he is totally unfamiliar with my work. I suspect that among his handlers there is a fan of Glenn Greenwald who prepared him for his appearance by simply telling him that I am a racist and a warmonger.